Roonwit, thanks for bringing the puzzle together with the info we have from Deathly Hallows. It all really seems to fit that Credence, if a Dumbledore would belong to a cousin's family. The only other explanation I would see if him being the son of Albus or Aberforth, where the mother would not have stayed with the father but gone away or returned to the US. I think we can rule out Albus, as he does not seem the type for a one-night-stand. even though his break up with Grindelwald could leave from for him seeking someone else, he seems to be gay and not bisexual. As for Aberforth. I don't know whether he would seek solice in a woman's arms after losing his mother and then sister. But still it does not feel quite right. All in all, the cousin-family seems more Rowling's style.

As to why Grimmson killed Irma it would help to keep Credence isolated so Grindelwald can continue to lure him and he wouldn't want Credence learning about his supposed sister (Irma would think that Leta was his sister unless she realized the babies were swapped before she gave him to the Barebones).

I think he is also using Credence's emotions. He is desparate to know about his background. Snatching away his one link to the past, isolates him even more and we see how much is emotions flare up when he attacks Grimmson. Grindelwald is carefully influencing him on all levels.

"Of course it is all in your head, but why on Earth should that mean it isn't real?" ~Dumbledore (DH)

... I think he is also using Credence's emotions. He is desparate to know about his background. Snatching away his one link to the past, isolates him even more and we see how much is emotions flare up when he attacks Grimmson. Grindelwald is carefully influencing him on all levels.

That could certainly explain why Irma was so quickly assassinated. Who knows what she might have said (like "yes, I knew that Leta switched the infants. I switched them back")? Even if that double switch did not occur, she would be identifying him (rightly or wrongly) as Corvus. If Credence believed he was a Lestrange, he would be turning to Leta, not to Grindelwald for help. That would not be helpful to Grindelwald.

Hmmm, I hadn't even considered the option of a double switch taking place. Irma does seem like one who would have her eyes everywhere, so the possibility is there. And yes, either way it would be important to make sure she does not say even more. I guess Grindelwald was happy for her saying she was not his mother but not more than that.

Rowling spends quite a long time on that whole story with Leta's brother. So it feels like it is not just a dead-end story. Whether Grindewald is correct or not about him being a Dumbledore, it feels like there is more to be found on that sinking ship, than the switch. Or do you think it will turn out to be like the tale around Hagrid's brother, that was a nice detour but not much more?

I think he is also using Credence's emotions. He is desparate to know about his background. Snatching away his one link to the past, isolates him even more and we see how much is emotions flare up when he attacks Grimmson. Grindelwald is carefully influencing him on all levels.

Yes. Now I consider it again, Credence is looking for Irma because of his birth certificate so Grindelwald needs him to find her or he will just keep looking, but then he needs to cut that link to the past as well once she confirms she was only a servant.Grindelwald seems very good at manipulating people, for example the directions in the script (Scene 114 in the amphitheatre) say Grindelwald "is deliberately playing on the unstable YOUNG RED-HAIRED WITCH'S feelings" resulting in her raising her wand which provokes the jumpiest young auror to attack first and kill her. I think he has been doing the same thing with Queenie. At first I wondered if there was something in the tea she had at Grindelwald's stolen house (the over eager teapot put me in mind of Umbridge trying to persuade Harry to drink his tea) but I now think he was just playing on her emotions as well. I think it is unlikely that Rosier found her and came to her rescue by accident when she got lost in the back streets, thus starting to win her over with kindness, and the bit of Grindelwald's speech in the amphitheatre (Scene 112) ending "--and for love" is deliberately addressed at Queenie and has the result that she is "now heart and soul his...".I think Grindelwald was right when he described Queenie as an innocent - she does what feels right at the time without thinking through the consequences and presumably just hoping that everything will turn out alright. So for example she wants to marry Jacob so enchants him and effectively kidnaps him, seemingly without thinking about how Jacob would feel about it when the enchantment was removed, how Newt would react when they turn up without warning, and what happens afterwards. It is obvious (to us at least) that they can't go back to New York without being arrested, so I assume she was relying on Newt to let them stay in his house afterwards because I doubt she planned how to get married beyond perhaps expecting Newt to arrange or just it turning up at the Ministry and asking. She also goes to Paris without being able to speak French and without a plan B if the French Ministry doesn't know where Tina is.Also in the amphitheatre she seems to think that Grindelwald's world will solve her problem and goes without thinking about what happens if Jacob doesn't want to come or gets incinerated by the fire to get to situation that might eventually bring a world were she can marry Jacob but which Jacob doesn't want to be a part of and also seemingly forgetting that Grindelwald tried to have her sister executed. I also wonder if the fact that she and Tina aren't talking added to her problems, as I can see Tina as a steadying influence and at least pointing out the likely consequences of her actions.

That could certainly explain why Irma was so quickly assassinated. Who knows what she might have said (like "yes, I knew that Leta switched the infants. I switched them back")? Even if that double switch did not occur, she would be identifying him (rightly or wrongly) as Corvus. If Credence believed he was a Lestrange, he would be turning to Leta, not to Grindelwald for help. That would not be helpful to Grindelwald.

I think a double switch is unlikely due to Leta's flower throttling Corvus's name on the family tree. I also think Leta would notice a switch back, given Corvus's constant crying, and Irma would have asked her about it if she noticed the babies were swapped, also Yusuf Kama would presumably be dead from the unbreakable vow for failing to kill Credence if he is actually Corvus.

Roonwit, you bring up very good points abut Queenie. She seems immature. Maybe Tina become her parent when they were orphaned and she has become so used to her sister being there to be the adult she herself just hid away from reality around her in her own little world. As I said before, her inability or disinterest to keep her legilimency skills in check, even when asked, already put me on edge. In a way it's nice to see Newt use that against her when she comes to call on him without invitation.

But thinking this futher, what does Grindelwald hope to gain from her? Her legilmency skills? Seeing people feel her doing it, there is no stealth to her skill and she does not seem to have any control over it.

I think a double switch is unlikely due to Leta's flower throttling Corvus's name on the family tree. I also think Leta would notice a switch back, given Corvus's constant crying, and Irma would have asked her about it if she noticed the babies were swapped, also Yusuf Kama would presumably be dead from the unbreakable vow for failing to kill Credence if he is actually Corvus.

I am releaved to read your words. It makes sense what you outline so I am happy to take it Credence is not Corvus. Grindelwald on the other hand will have a little more work to do before I fully believe his words though.

"Of course it is all in your head, but why on Earth should that mean it isn't real?" ~Dumbledore (DH)

But thinking this futher, what does Grindelwald hope to gain from her? Her legilmency skills? Seeing people feel her doing it, there is no stealth to her skill and she does not seem to have any control over it.

I don't think people do feel her reading minds, but she generally doesn't try to hide what she hears, and normally replies or reacts as if it was normal speech. I think Grindelwald has already used Queenie to read what Credence is thinking which is actually a bit strange because Grindelwald generally seems to read people and know how to manipulate them without help (unless he is just being extra cautious because it is important).

Of course she could also serve a hostage or leverage if Tina or Newt get too close, though Grindelwald to be careful which of his own thoughts she "hears" because I doubt she would like the whole truth, and similarly for some of his followers.

Hmm, I thought all three of the quartet at some point asked her to stop in the first film , even before she commented. But I'll have to go over the screenplay to be sure (I've ordered them as I'd really like to get more into the details). Perhaps, it's because they get to know how it feels as she is so close?

As I read your words about Grindelwald having to be careful of his thoughts. I would suspect he knows to block his thoughts. We do not know if Albus by this point has learnt to be a legilimens, but even so he is dealing with too many wizards to not guard his thoughts.

This does make me wonder though if Queenie could become a Snape-like character. She seems to have followed Grindelwald of her own choice (although possibly influenced by him) but at some point she will probably realise that he is not creating the wordl she wants. Could she become a double agent (when she finally grows up more)? Could she end up helping the others from the inside in some way? She does not seem to be as strong as Snape, but that could be the ace up her sleeve, that they do not expect her to double cross.

"Of course it is all in your head, but why on Earth should that mean it isn't real?" ~Dumbledore (DH)

As I read your words about Grindelwald having to be careful of his thoughts. I would suspect he knows to block his thoughts. We do not know if Albus by this point has learnt to be a legilimens, but even so he is dealing with too many wizards to not guard his thoughts.

I am sure he does control his thoughts, and was doing so during his speech at the amphitheatre, but the question is can he do that consistently which is something that even Voldemort wasn't entirely successful at.

This does make me wonder though if Queenie could become a Snape-like character. She seems to have followed Grindelwald of her own choice (although possibly influenced by him) but at some point she will probably realise that he is not creating the wordl she wants. Could she become a double agent (when she finally grows up more)? Could she end up helping the others from the inside in some way? She does not seem to be as strong as Snape, but that could be the ace up her sleeve, that they do not expect her to double cross.

I think it is difficult to predict how she might behave - in the first film she did a very good job of rescuing Jacob, finding the others and getting them out of MACUSA, but she seemed rather out of her depth in this film. Thus she could probably do great things in the right circumstances and right frame of mind, but might struggle in others.

I have also realized that if Credence really is a Dumbledore then Albus could have suspected Leta's switch and who Credence really was. This is because in this case he may well have known that his relatives (ie. baby Credence and his aunt - the screenplay says he is with his aunt) were travelling to America and that they were presumed lost after their ship sank, but when he saw Leta's Boggart he might have connected the two and checked the passenger list (possibly from muggle sources) to find that Leta was on the same ship, and realized the babies might have been switched because Leta is less likely have been haunted by the death of an unknown baby.This leads to the question of why Dumbledore "sent" Newt to New York? Was it because Grindelwald was there or because Credence was?

I think legilimency and blocking it is a skill closely linked to your emotions. Similar to maintaining a patronus if you can keep your emotions in check your blocking of legilimency should be easier and more consistent than when you lose control of your emotions. We see this happen with Snape, when Harry breaks through his defence for a quck glimpse when Snape is flustered.

I have also realized that if Credence really is a Dumbledore then Albus could have suspected Leta's switch and who Credence really was. This is because in this case he may well have known that his relatives (ie. baby Credence and his aunt - the screenplay says he is with his aunt) were travelling to America and that they were presumed lost after their ship sank, but when he saw Leta's Boggart he might have connected the two and checked the passenger list (possibly from muggle sources) to find that Leta was on the same ship, and realized the babies might have been switched because Leta is less likely have been haunted by the death of an unknown baby.This leads to the question of why Dumbledore "sent" Newt to New York? Was it because Grindelwald was there or because Credence was?

Yes, they really tip-toe around that don't they? Newt and Albus come so close to actually saying why Albus sent him, but of course Rowling is just teasing us. To me I cannot think of anything else but the whole Credence question that would warrant Albus leading Newt down the trail. Unless he had caught wind of Grindelwald being there undercover?

As to Leta's boggart. It makes sense that Albus could have chickened on to what the boggart was representing. For one, possibly there some legilimency happening here? And secondly I think that the tale of the Lestrange's wuld be known amongst the teachers in some form or another, if not even around the school. Leta is retaliating to the kids meanness, yet the way McGonagall handles it makes me think there is some understanding of the story behind her character.

This leads to the question of why Dumbledore "sent" Newt to New York? Was it because Grindelwald was there or because Credence was?

First of all, hi! Long time no chat. Remember me?

Second of all, THIS. So much THIS!!!

I would imagine, knowing Dumbledore, a little of both. I think Credence is more likely. The question then becomes HOW Dumbledore would have known either were there. Grindelwald was in disguise, but is there a way Dumbledore could have known his general whereabouts because of the blood pact? Some kind of blood magic trace? Second of all, Credence: I would imagine Dumbledore was tuned into his existence because of the evidence of an Obscurus in NYC showing up in the news -- things other people wouldn't have seen necessarily, but Dumbledore would have read between the lines, like he did with the death of the Muggle at the beginning of GoF, and intuited the presence of the Obscurus. Haunted by the guilt over Ariana's death, would he have been interested in tracking the Obscurus in order to help prevent another disaster? Or to look at how he could have saved his sister?

I was chatting with a co-worker and we wondered whether Credence was a Dumbledore, but not a "real" Dumbledore. As in, could Grindelwald have somehow used the blood pact to create a brother for Albus (like a clone, using blood magic -- think Voldemort's SnakeBaby Homunculus Body in GoF)? Can wizards create life? If they can transfigure a teacup into a mouse, and if Voldemort could create a living vessel for his spirit, I think we have to assume they can.

I was chatting with a co-worker and we wondered whether Credence was a Dumbledore, but not a "real" Dumbledore. As in, could Grindelwald have somehow used the blood pact to create a brother for Albus (like a clone, using blood magic -- think Voldemort's SnakeBaby Homunculus Body in GoF)? Can wizards create life? If they can transfigure a teacup into a mouse, and if Voldemort could create a living vessel for his spirit, I think we have to assume they can.

Hello

I am not sure whether wizards are capable of creating or transfiguring a human being or not, but if Grindelwald had been able to do this, why would he not know Credence in the first FB story and even seemed to be wondering if Modesty, the little girl, were the Obscurial. On the other hand, he very much prizes the vial of mixed blood, and it hard to imagine that is strictly sentimentality that motivates him.Why does he need it? what does he intend to do with it? what are its powers? JKR has deliberately withheld such information.

The question then becomes HOW Dumbledore would have known either were there. Grindelwald was in disguise, but is there a way Dumbledore could have known his general whereabouts because of the blood pact? Some kind of blood magic trace?

I wonder if he even needs that. We know that Dumbledore is very astute (at least in later life) in recognising magic signature. I believe he comments on this in Half-Blood Prince that he knows how Tom Riddle thinks and casts spells. I would not be surprised if he has kept an eye on Grindelwalds movements im part also in the traces he leaves behind. Just because nobody in MCUSA suspects Graves is not who he seems to be, does not mean that Dumbledore might not recognise little things in reports, whether these be in newspapers or he learns tidbits through the British Ministry or other ways.

Haunted by the guilt over Ariana's death, would [Albus] have been interested in tracking the Obscurus in order to help prevent another disaster? Or to look at how he could have saved his sister?

I think Ariana's death will play a big role in his actions. And I have a feeling it might also be shapingn Grindelwald's actions in a way. He has seen with her how powerful raw magical energy is, and maybe thinks he hasl learnt some things through his experience with her to "help" him "guide" Credence. Likewise Albus will be driven by her loss, to stop others from meeting a similar fate. Obscurus or not, he will have seen how devastating it is for someone who is trying to suppress their magical abilities.

As to Credence being the borther. I guess it is really said in the movie, so I'll have to swallow that pill. The huge time-line problem aside. one thing does make sense: All the Dumbledore children's name's start with an 'A'. So in that respect he slots in – even if it is just a detail that fits. The only thing I can see that only half fits is that Percival would have fallen in love – or was charmed/forced/jinxed – by a female inmate at Azkaban. We still face hin having died by the time Kendra dies (I believe the Dumbledore children are described as orphaned when that event occurs), but it's a little easier to overcome than him and Kendra already being apart several years by that time. I don't know how wizarding law would handle Kendra having another child after Percival's imprisonment (or death) as to which surname the child would receive – otherwise that might be a possibility too, I guess.

I am not sure whether wizards are capable of creating or transfiguring a human being or not, but if Grindelwald had been able to do this, why would he not know Credence in the first FB story and even seemed to be wondering if Modesty, the little girl, were the Obscurial. On the other hand, he very much prizes the vial of mixed blood, and it hard to imagine that is strictly sentimentality that motivates him.Why does he need it? what does he intend to do with it? what are its powers? JKR has deliberately withheld such information.

I agree. The body Pettigrew forms with Voldemort help, is only interim and it seems like it would not survive. Seeing Credence does not already exist as a soul it seems unlikely Grindelwald could have used a similar approach to Voldemort's resurrection.

I think the vial is a safety for Grindelwald. At the end of the film Albus hints that he might be able to destroy it. Just like a horcrux is a safety for the soul, the blood-pact is an object that provides safety that neither can touch the other. Might it even be the destruction of the blood vial that later helps Dumbledore figure out howto destroy horcruxes?

"Of course it is all in your head, but why on Earth should that mean it isn't real?" ~Dumbledore (DH)

The question then becomes HOW Dumbledore would have known either were there. Grindelwald was in disguise, but is there a way Dumbledore could have known his general whereabouts because of the blood pact? Some kind of blood magic trace?

I wonder if he even needs that. We know that Dumbledore is very astute (at least in later life) in recognising magic signature.

The problem here is that I think he would have to be on the scene or nearby to detect magical traces and I doubt that he went to New York as I suspect that might count as acting against Grindelwald which the blood pact stops (this may also be part of why his instructions to Newt are indirect; telling him about the trafficed Thunderbird knowing it would take Newt to New York, and later telling him that Credence is in Paris) and he doesn't want to add to the suspicions that the British Ministry already have about him. I think Dumbledore is simply getting reports of unusual activity through his international contacts such as the young Ilvermorny professor that encourages Flamel to go to the cemetery (though it may be Flamel who is leading the group), and he could well have deduced the presence of an Obscurus in New York from the events there. In addition the newspaper montage at the start of the first film implies that the magical newspapers are speculating about the possibility of Grindelwald being in New York by ending with a newsprint picture of the Statue of Liberty.

As to Credence being the borther. I guess it is really said in the movie, so I'll have to swallow that pill. The huge time-line problem aside. one thing does make sense: All the Dumbledore children's name's start with an 'A'. So in that respect he slots in – even if it is just a detail that fits. The only thing I can see that only half fits is that Percival would have fallen in love – or was charmed/forced/jinxed – by a female inmate at Azkaban. We still face hin having died by the time Kendra dies (I believe the Dumbledore children are described as orphaned when that event occurs), but it's a little easier to overcome than him and Kendra already being apart several years by that time. I don't know how wizarding law would handle Kendra having another child after Percival's imprisonment (or death) as to which surname the child would receive – otherwise that might be a possibility too, I guess.

It is implied rather than stated in the film with Grindelwald (who could be lying) being part of the source so I am treating it as possible but not certain. If it is true that Credence is Albus' brother then he is most likely Percival's son - Kendra would have be alive 2 years after she is supposed to have died, but it would just take Rita to be wrong about Albus being an orphan when Kendra died and a loose interpretation of him being "head of the family" for Percival to be alive long enough to father another child, presumably as you suggest with another inmate of Azkaban or possibly a visitor. It would also explain why there was no mention of another Dumbledore child in the HP books, which would be obvious if it was Kendra's, much less so a child of Azkaban, possibly with an unidentified father.

I think the vial is a safety for Grindelwald. At the end of the film Albus hints that he might be able to destroy it. Just like a horcrux is a safety for the soul, the blood-pact is an object that provides safety that neither can touch the other. Might it even be the destruction of the blood vial that later helps Dumbledore figure out howto destroy horcruxes?

I agree that the vial is protecting Grindelwald. We don't know the consequences of breaking a blood pact but I suspect it is bad enough to stop him acting directly against Grindelwald (would it make sense for it to result in a blood curse?). However I doubt it will be easy for Dumbledore to destroy the vial safely without it counting as breaking the pact. It is probably protecting Dumbledore from Grindelwald as well though perhaps not if he acts through another person of Dumbledore's blood.

As to Credence being the borther. I guess it is really said in the movie, so I'll have to swallow that pill. The huge time-line problem aside. one thing does make sense: All the Dumbledore children's name's start with an 'A'. So in that respect he slots in – even if it is just a detail that fits. The only thing I can see that only half fits is that Percival would have fallen in love – or was charmed/forced/jinxed – by a female inmate at Azkaban. We still face hin having died by the time Kendra dies (I believe the Dumbledore children are described as orphaned when that event occurs), but it's a little easier to overcome than him and Kendra already being apart several years by that time. I don't know how wizarding law would handle Kendra having another child after Percival's imprisonment (or death) as to which surname the child would receive – otherwise that might be a possibility too, I guess.

That's why I'm thinking blood magic might be a possibility - it solves the time line problem. But you're right -- if Grindelwald did create Credence, he should have known where he was -- unless he used the blood to create Credence but didn't stick around to see him born, etc. The shipwreck situation muddies those waters (pun intended). Although they also raise some other questions, like... who was WITH Credence on the boat when he was swapped with Corvis?

Another possibility, if it's not a blood magic situation, is that Kendra was maybe expecting Aurelius before she died, which would make him a lot younger than the other Dumbledores (though the age is still problematic -- could a wizard be put in some kind of stasis?). We still don't know who put him on the boat and was accompanying him. I like the idea of Bathilda Bagshot being somehow involved -- I'd love to meet her in a future movie.

Side note... do you guys think Corvis is officially drowned and dead? Or do you think there's a possibility he survived and will make a future appearance?

I am not sure whether wizards are capable of creating or transfiguring a human being or not, but if Grindelwald had been able to do this, why would he not know Credence in the first FB story and even seemed to be wondering if Modesty, the little girl, were the Obscurial. On the other hand, he very much prizes the vial of mixed blood, and it hard to imagine that is strictly sentimentality that motivates him.Why does he need it? what does he intend to do with it? what are its powers? JKR has deliberately withheld such information.

I agree. The body Pettigrew forms with Voldemort help, is only interim and it seems like it would not survive. Seeing Credence does not already exist as a soul it seems unlikely Grindelwald could have used a similar approach to Voldemort's resurrection.

I think the vial is a safety for Grindelwald. At the end of the film Albus hints that he might be able to destroy it. Just like a horcrux is a safety for the soul, the blood-pact is an object that provides safety that neither can touch the other. Might it even be the destruction of the blood vial that later helps Dumbledore figure out howto destroy horcruxes?

Yeah, that's my chief problem with my theory. But I'm thinking about whether he could have used the blood to create Credence using a surrogate (Ew, sorry) -- and then came back later, tracking him using the blood to witch hunter's home, but was unable to figure out which person in the home was the Dumbledore (kind of like the Trace knew where Harry lived, but not who cast a specific spell).

Roonwit, your thought how a broken blood-pact could turn into a blood-curse intrigues me. It would be typical Rowling to introduce the two notions seemingly unrelated but close together to later make us go "doh, they're right next to each other!" But then if true, how on earth did Dumbledore get out of that one without turning that curse on him when getting rid of the vial. Or … is Dumbledore defeating, yet not killing Grindelwald the loophole? I.e. Dumbledore finds a way to weaken or interpret the pact in a way that allows him to imprison him for all intents and purposes unharmed (seeing Grindelwald lives quite a long life even though imprisoned). We have seen with the unbreakable vow that the used words in the vow are extremely important. Snape knew to use the loopholes. We don't know if words are spoken when the blood pact is made, but there might be other features to this bit of magic that could offer loopholes.

Twiddlethosedials, let's say for a moment that Credence past is fishy or there are reasons to keep it well underwraps. A ship-wreck is a perfect way to indeed muddy the waters (great pun!). Even Leta swapping the babies could be influenced by someone staging the whole thing, whether through blatant means such as the imperius (followed by implanting false memories like Riddle did to his uncle) or by more subtle means. But then why would they lose track of the child unless someone else was trying to shield him after catching wind of what might have occurred (Dumbledore did that by placing Harry with his Muggle-family).

I'd love to see Bagshot too. I think she would an interesting character. But if she were on the boat, it would be weird that she would survive whilst the (swapped) baby dies. Though you could be right: we don't know if the baby was rescued unknown to Leta. But then again we have the family tree declaring she killed him. Oh the circles we are running!

"Of course it is all in your head, but why on Earth should that mean it isn't real?" ~Dumbledore (DH)